Page 226 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 6 March 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
It is nonsense for proponents of the free market to say that they cannot intervene. The market is already influenced by taxes and spending regimes, including negative gearing, the halving of the capital gains tax in 1999, first home buyers grants and other subsidies and revenue forgone. The federal government has to take some responsibility for the failure of that market to provide adequate housing for a significant and growing number of people. The question for that government to address is how to ensure economic signals can stimulate investment in affordable housing.
In 2005, at the National Summit on Housing Affordability, a national joint meeting of housing, local government and planning ministers, it was agreed to develop a national housing plan and to negotiate a five-year national affordable housing agreement. Once again, this was a process to think about a process. I have not heard how it is progressing. What we need now are real policy initiatives.
Australia is party to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which obliges all governments, local and federal, to implement and protect the rights contained in that covenant. The right to adequate housing was defined in 1991 by the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. There are seven aspects of the right considered to be protected under the covenant. Affordability is included in this list. It states:
Personal or household financial costs associated with housing should be at such a level that the attainment and satisfaction of other basic needs are not threatened or compromised. Steps should be taken by state parties to ensure that the percentage of housing related costs is, in general, commensurate with income levels.
It is in that context that we should look at what has and has not been done in Australia in general and in the ACT in particular.
In 2002, an affordable housing task force set up by the Labor government of the time reported on the issues, recommending a number of measures, including inclusionary zoning. No implementation strategy was ever put in place. Last year the ACT housing minister held a housing summit which was supposed to look at the problem, but any positive outcome seemed to be overrun by the Costello review.
More recently, the Chief Minister set up a task group to recommend action on the issue, and we are eagerly awaiting a report from that group. In the meantime we have seen the release of some blocks of land at so-called affordable prices in west Macgregor. But this is more or less an extension of the government’s previous moderate income land balance scheme which has not been shown to be particularly successful. In this case I imagine the outcome will be only a few houses being built on small blocks and later perhaps sold off for a windfall profit. There is nothing in place to ensure that the affordability benefits will be passed on to or returned to the community. It would make more sense for the government to give land free to Housing ACT in order to support its plans to increase the supply of social housing across Canberra.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .